California Republicans are clever. Sick of seeing their state's electoral votes awarded quadrennially to the opposition--Democrats have been able to pencil it in since 1992--they've borrowed liberal arguments against the winner-take-all system to bolster a ballot question that, if passed, would award the state's presidential vote winner just two electoral votes and award the remaining 53 on a district-by-district basis. In other words, instead of Republicans getting shut out of the Golden State's golden electoral prize, the GOP would likely pick up twenty or so electoral votes.

The Constitution established the Electoral College, but it doesn't impose on the states a singular way in which electors are to be selected. Maine and Nebraska, for instance, award electoral votes on a district-by-district basis (with the statewide winner picking up the two additional votes), so California would not be alone should they go this route. Where California would depart from Maine and Nebraska is its likelihood of splitting its pot of electoral votes. Despite allowing for it, Maine and Nebraska, because of small size and political homogeneity, have never split their votes. California, because of its massive size and political diversity, would split votes in every election.

The Electoral College defers to state power, in the same way that the Senate does. It is a part of federalism, like the Senate. Liberals don't like this reminder of the system of governance the founders intended. They see the Electoral College as a relic, making the 2000 election in which Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College all the more stunning. Rather than the states electing the president, they'd prefer a plurality of the people. Naturally, efforts to make the system more democratic, and less representative of the states, meet with their approval.

Alas, the practical results of a principled stand in California on making the Electoral College more democratic would make the White House less Democratic. Wily Republicans can tout the economic benefits the state will reap from advertising dollars and campaign promises once the state is in play again. Presidential candidates will campaign there not just to suck money from the utters of the state's cash cows, or to help downticket candidates, but for direct, personal, and pressing reasosns. More so than under winner-take-all, every vote will count. The votes the state awards will more proportionately resemble the votes the state's people cast. It doesn't eliminate the Electoral College--a liberal's dream since at least the progressive era--but it makes it more responsive to the people.

Many of the arguments Republicans will use to propel the ballot question will no doubt echo those used by Al Gore partisans in 2000. Alas, something tells me those arguments won't be as persuasive to California liberals in 2008 as they were to Florida liberals in 2000.

Very clever. Were they able to pull it off, it's doubtful the Democrats would win another presidential election... ever.

I wonder whether they will be able to pull it off.

This is rather off topic but:

Why are comments on older posts disabled? I got back from vacation and went to reply to skeptic in the "Hillary no Karl Marx, Romney no Adam Smith" thread, to find that there was no longer a box to add new comments.

I think your comment speaks to why they won't pull it off Brad. Another pie in the sky electoral reform I would like to see would be the inclusion of "None of the Above" as a candidate for all races to break the two party coalition of bad politicians. If None of the Above wins then their has to be a new election w/ all new candidates from both party, that would cause them to actually have to stand for something and reflect the will of the people. Call it the "Brewster's Millions" reform.

Ben, Flynn closes off posts to previous months posts to block the sicko spammers that you have likely noticed cluttering his trackbacks and comment sections w/ junk.

I don't know, I kind of liked the 'nympho lesbian slut' sites. Now what am I going to do between posts?